Build Your Own Wasteland 2

By Craig Pearson on December 6th, 2012 at 7:00 pm.

That's a good doo, sir.
Left a bit. Too far! Right. Right. RIGHT! Oh sorry, I didn’t see you there. I was just practicing telling Wasteland 2 developers inXile what to do with the assets I’m ready, willing, and prepared to generate for Wasteland 2. And because I’m lovely and like to share these things, I’m going to tell you how you can be in the position to have a building or prop in their upcoming apocalyptic RPG. Engine makers Unity and inXile are teaming up to allow gamers to take part in paid-for work for the game. Just, you know, be exceptional.

Every week, inXile will be uploading game concept art here. There’s already some up there, in fact. Then it’s up to the players to make the best damn version of it that they can. To do that, you’d best read up on the Wasteland 2 art style.

Now you know what’s expected, could you make this bike for them? It’s described as “beat to shit”, which is also my rap name.

The creator can then upload their 3D model to the Unity Asset store, marking it “hold for inXile Entertainment”, and Unity will forward the best on to inXile. Here’s the important bit: “If a fan’s assets are chosen they will be paid as well as given credit in the game.”

So it’s not exploitative, though the idea of the losers putting all that work in and getting nothing seems a but unfair. Those that might not be quite up to scratch can still be added to the Unity store for general use, at least. It’s being pitched as a way for the community to have some direct involvement with the game, but it’ll also allow the developers to focus on making the gamey parts gooder with gaminess. and getting goodier games full of gaminess is why we’re all here, yes?

, .

133 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. JFS says:

    Okay… how will art direction work on that, there’s basically zero consistence in that model?

    • wccrawford says:

      Well, except the clear art style directions they’ve given. And the fact that they aren’t just buying everything. They’ve got to accept it first.

      As for the ‘losers’, their work will still be on the assets store, just like the winners.

      • rebeccaadams15 says:

        Start working with Google. $85 an hour! Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…And what’s awesome is I’m working from home so I get more time with my kids. Here’s where I went..Read More

        • The Dark One says:

          A link to “youtubegoogle” dot qr dot net? Why wouldn’t I trust that!?!

    • theleif says:

      Jesus story is indeed flabbergasting…

  2. Premium User Badge

    DanielBrauer says:

    If they actually get some stuff they like, then this sounds like an excellent way to externalize risk and time wasted making assets that don’t meet their requirements. Which is kind of the definition of exploitative.

    • monkeybars says:

      This whole game process has been about externalizing risk. Makes me glad I’ve stayed away from any and all Kickstarter game efforts.

      • Prime-Mover says:

        Why is that? Is donating £7-£10 really that big a gamble from your part?

      • The Random One says:

        “This whole project has used novel ways to avoid all the pitfalls usually associated with a big creative project. Glad I got nothin’ to do with it!”

    • transientmind says:

      All I see are two camps.

      Camp One:
      ‘Hey, we need to do things on the cheap and we know there are a lot of talented hobbyists out there who love the game and would be thrilled to bits to help us out, let’s do something fun to get everyone involved, pool our resources, and pick whatever we think is actually good enough to be in there. Bonus: we get art that matches our style guide, fans either get their assets in the game and the thrill of contributing, or if it’s not the right style for us, it can still get them into the Unity store to help out some other devs whose style it might actually fit. Winners everywhere!’

      Camp Two:
      ‘Hey, we do this for a living, and all of a sudden these guys are inviting hobbyists and amateurs to do it for practically free instead of paying us? So what, is this going to be a thing now – my job isn’t valuable enough to get paid for, it’s OK to crowd-source my living for peanuts? What happens to my income if more companies take this route? It’s already hard enough finding decently-paying work as it is, the last thing my profession needs is to be taken a la carte. We already have companies out there pressuring us into exploitative work who use very similar tactics and rationales, effectively getting our work for peanuts anyway – all this behaviour does is erode the public awareness of how unfair those guys are being to the professionals like us.’

      And unfortunately for Camp 2, I see this heading the same way as journalists complaining about internet news and blogging.

      Guess what happens to your pay when there are loads of talented people out there willing to do what you do, but for free? Even worse if they actually happen to be really good at it. That’s a completely different issue and you can go look it up if you want to see just how challenging it is, but for now to the uninitiated, just realize that’s where these folks in Camp 2 are coming from. They use the ‘exploitative’ label because it’s the language they’re familiar to applying to behaviours elsewhere in the industry that see them professionally diminished.

      Just because their position is valid doesn’t mean they’re going to get their way, or that they should get their way.
      My girlfriend performs sexual favours for me with little to no compensation – sometimes I might pay for dinner, or sometimes buy her presents. Is that exploitative? Are all relationships exploitative? Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean you can tack that label on it. The fans WANT to do this, the devs are entering into an arrangement which allows them to. Calling it exploitative is like saying you’re exploiting your girlfriend if you aren’t paying sex-worker rates.

      • RodHope says:

        So she doesn’t enjoy the sex? You should really try harder. Maybe give her some love back.

    • Grargh says:

      What the hell is going on with all of you? They said they will post one piece of concept art a week, for which they choose one community made asset if there is one good enough and fitting the art direction. Until the proposed release date, that’s less than 50 assets. Do you really believe this will be any significant part of the game’s content? It’s a way to let fans participate, beyond “have a minor NPC carry your very exciting name”.

      But then you cry for modding support, so the community can overhaul the complete game for no pay anyway.

  3. SonicTitan says:

    I think this brings up some interesting questions about the nature of artist and audience interaction in the creation of a piece. We know that video games are unique in their multitude of interpretations, regardless of what the developer “intends”, but ever since Minecraft, even the development process itself has begun to blur, becoming less of a singular endeavor by a small group of people and one that’s being informed by the public it’s being sold to. Some may call that exploitative, and some may lament the death of the auteur, but I think this is ultimately the most logical path for games development to take.

  4. Lewie Procter says:

    I, however, think that spec work is exploitative.

    • MondSemmel says:

      Right. I wonder by which definition this could possibly not be called exploitative.

      • iridescence says:

        In my opinion, exploitation requires either coercion or the false expectation that you will some payment or reward for what you are doing.

        No one is being forced or pressured to do this and no one expects to get paid or rewarded for it if they don’t win so if they volunteer to do it anyway how is that exploitation. exactly?

    • Premium User Badge

      DanielBrauer says:

      You are far from alone.

      • Premium User Badge

        Lars Westergren says:

        From the link you posted:

        —-
        ** Is my contest spec work?

        To answer this, ask yourself:

        * Will I equitably pay a winning designer for the work rendered as if they were hired under contract to do the same thing?
        * Will I negotiate a proper compensation for the usage rights commensurate to their level of skill?
        * Will I return the working files and usage rights to ALL designs submitted, particularly if they don’t win?
        If the answer is “no” to any of these questions then your contest likely promotes speculative work.
        —-

        And the answer to these questions are:
        1. Depends, it is the seller who decides the price.
        2. Yes, if they priced their own stuff right
        3. Yes, they may still be sold through the Unity Store.

        So no, this is not spec work.

        Money being exchanged for goods or services? Oh, the horror!

        • Zenicetus says:

          As a former commercial artist (among other things), I’d call it spec work, absolutely!.

          That can be defined several ways, but the key feature here is that they’re showing specific concept art for each submission. It’s irrelevant whether the losing bids can try to sell their versions. The requirement to match concept art makes it spec work, by any reasonable definition.

          • N says:

            Pretty much yeah, it is def spec work and the only thing this type of practice encourages is quickly made low-quality work.

            Which is great if they want a mediocre game :3

          • Shuck says:

            @N: “the only thing this type of practice encourages is quickly made low-quality work.”
            I think you may be underestimating how much people want credit in a shipped game. There are a whole lot of people willing to put in a lot of hours for no monetary compensation at all as a way of getting a foot in the door in the industry. Though I think all it really does is devalue their work.

          • Baines says:

            He’s also underestimating how people like to show off their ability, or just try a challenge.

            It isn’t uncommon to see threads on 3D modelling forums with some arbitrary challenge that people try to meet, like “re-envision a character to a different style” or “make a model with X poly limit and Y texture restriction”, and some really high quality work tends to get posted, for no prize, no cash, no job opportunity… Just to challenge yourself to both see what you can do, and to show others (or even to inspire others).

          • N says:

            It devalues their work only if they put effort (especially for free) like schmucks for something they don’t enjoy/believe in.

            The danger is with letting just about anyone model for you. Very few actually put in lots of hours for modelling prop-work, usually they even re-use old assets. That is another problem with spec work, many will just throw in older stuff. Look at the bike-rack for example, how many will just re-use an old bike they have lying around their HD? I only hope this affair attracts few and very talented people.

            L.E. for Baines

            That’s actually a good example, but usually those projects take place for long periods of time (months even) so that people can do it in their free time and spend as much time as they wish. Also, that is a select group of individuals (on the few good modelling forums around the net) that do not grow on trees, we can only hope they end up working on this thing, considering many have full-time jobs in the industry already.

    • Jason Lefkowitz says:

      Yeah, that was my reaction too. This feels a bit like those Web sites where cheap-ass companies go to get a logo for $5. Yes the eventual “winner” gets paid for their work, but the other entrants don’t. Even if you don’t think it crosses the line into exploitation, it definitely feels tacky, especially coming from people who were just handed nearly $3 million with no strings attached by the same community they’re now asking to work for them on the cheap.

      The other thing that disturbs me about this is that the major selling point of the whole Wasteland 2 thing was the vision of the developers, and I would think art assets would be a major component of realizing that vision. How a game looks is a huge part of defining its overall aesthetic. Borderlands, for instance, was a pretty bog-standard FPS play-wise, but it was set apart from the pack by its fresh, cartoony art style. I don’t see how you get that kind of unified, smoothly integrated result if creating the assets is something you’re jobbing out to anonymous people as Internet piecework.

      • pakoito says:

        Making boulders and background items takes a lot of time out of development, I’d rather have the artists working in foreground game stuff than low poly scenery. The quality of the clutter rocks doesn’t compromise the game’s *vision* in any way.

        Comic, animation and manga artists do it all the time, why not game developers? You can outsource it to a nobody or a company, or your fanbase. They chose B as an experiment, if it fails or people feel exploited don’t worry, they won’t do it again.

        I don’t think of Skyrim or Warband modders as “exploited” for creating quality game content. They do it out of love, CV or challenge.

      • Premium User Badge

        Lars Westergren says:

        > by the same community they’re now asking to work for them on the cheap.

        No, they are asking anyone wno is interested.

        • Prime-Mover says:

          Furthermore, forum members have specifically requested the opportunity to lend a hand in the design portion of the game. We’re talking about a game here where some people have paid a lot of money during the kickstarter campaign, just to be able to contribute by e.g. creating a personalized game asset (weapon, location, artifact). I imagine some people sees this as a further way to contribute to a project they feel pasionate about.

          It is certainly not about exploiting the poor designers, who for some reason are unable to say no to this kind of work.

      • belgand says:

        What it feels like to me is that they want to just be able to buy certain art assets from the Unity Asset Store. When they went to look they couldn’t find everything they wanted so they got the idea to encourage people to build what they wanted based on their concept art, post it to the store, and then they could buy it.

        The part where I became unhappy was when they decided to start purchasing assets rather than making them in-house. This just feels like a way for them to encourage people to make the things they want to buy.

        • Shuck says:

          And the thing about items on the Unity store is that they’re going to be priced a lot lower than if it was spec work. The assumption is that the items will be sold multiple times; if you’re building assets according to a particular spec, that isn’t necessarily the case. But it’ll still be priced as if it was. Which means even if the assets are used, work that might take a day or two (depending on how complex an item they’re asking for) might only get an hour’s wage in compensation.
          They may have had the best intentions (wanting to include community art and compensate the artists), but given the context of exploitative labor practices with game art, and the practicalities of how this is set up, they just couldn’t win.

    • Gyro says:

      So, would literary magazines that solicit submissions be exploitative?

      • pakoito says:

        Well, RPS exploited some people when they were out choosing a new writer last year. They could ask them.

        • monkeybars says:

          The portfolio-based hiring process is hardly exploitative. Unless I missed something, you submitted your work to RPS for evaluation; they weren’t allowed to run it if you weren’t hired, I should hope.

        • Melliflue says:

          There’s a difference between asking to see a sample of someone’s work when looking to hire somebody and asking them to do something specifically for you, as is the case with inXile giving out concept art. A writer could probably use previous work (maybe some freelance stuff for other websites/magazines) as examples of his/her skill. If inXile were asking for submissions of any kind of 3D modelling and then hiring someone based on that then the RPS situation would be analogous.

          I guess the crucial points are whether or not the company wants something made specifically for them and whether or not the company will use the work submitted. Examples of skill/talent are fine, asking for specific work is not.

      • Premium User Badge

        Stellar Duck says:

        As far as I know you can submit a piece to another magazine after a rejection? I rather doubt you can submit your Wasteland decrepit shack to another game. Or am I wrong?

        • pakoito says:

          That’s where Unity’s asset store kicks in. Your assets are there and people buy them if they fit their needs. You don’t have to pitch them. And they sell well enough as far as I know.

          • Premium User Badge

            Stellar Duck says:

            Aha. It still rubs me the wrong way though. They are still asking people to expend time and effort for no real benefit other than a chance that someone might or might not pick up the asset.

          • pakoito says:

            You could say the same about any mod-heavy game, yet this one reports economical benefit. I don’t understand the backlash.

          • Bhazor says:

            So it’s exploitative because they are asking people to work for money?

          • Premium User Badge

            Stellar Duck says:

            @Bhazor

            But is that what they’re doing? Seems to me they’re asking people to do their work and then cherry picking the best piece and having all the others have spent time on the off chance that someone else will pay 10€ to licence whatever they made.

          • Bhazor says:

            … that’s basically their job. That’s what freelance modelers/artists do.

          • Premium User Badge

            Stellar Duck says:

            I was under the impression that a freelancer would generally be hired on the strength of her portfolio and then commissioned to do whatever needs doing? As in getting hired and then doing the job and get paid. This is doing the job and hope you get paid. Sort of reverse, from where I’m standing.

        • Premium User Badge

          Lars Westergren says:

          > I rather doubt you can submit your Wasteland decrepit shack to another game. Or am I wrong?

          You are wrong. “Whether or not your asset is selected by the Wasteland 2 team, it will be available for purchase in the Unity Asset Store by any other developers using Unity-“

        • SonicTitan says:

          Not to mention, writers don’t (usually) write pieces and then try to sell them, but solicit ideas and then write a piece based on a publisher’s specifications. I see what you’re getting at with your analogy, but it’s a little off.

          • Premium User Badge

            Stellar Duck says:

            Ah, well, I was just going from my very limited experience on article submissions. I’ve had exactly one article submitted and rejected to a very, very niche publication but nothing would prevent me from submitting it elsewhere other than the fact that very few relevant publications exist.

          • Spider Jerusalem says:

            i’m not sure what type of writing you’re referring to, but that is most certainly not true of fiction, poetry, non-fiction, genre fiction, etc. most writers (read: unestablished writers) do indeed write the thing and they try and get someone to buy the thing.

          • Premium User Badge

            Stellar Duck says:

            That query letter seems to suggest that the piece is already written?

          • Spider Jerusalem says:

            i’m (still) not sure how query letters prove your strange point that writers try to sell writings that haven’t been written (or even stranger, that they wait to hear from publishers about what they should be writing).

            you do understand that the thing that comes (hopefully, in the mind of the writer) after the query letter is the sending off of a completed manuscript, right? that is, in fact, the whole point of the query letter. and they’re sent to agents mostly, not publishers (unless you enjoy the vague feeling of far off people laughing at you).

            the only time (generally) writers sell things they haven’t written is when they’re already quite well-known, and/or if they sign multi-book deals.

      • monkeybars says:

        Literary magazines come out on a weekly/monthly/yearly/whatever schedule so it is a very different production process, and their readers expect variety in the writing every month — they don’t want consistency in the literary style, except in serial stories — but those are typically not the entirety of the magazine. They expect consistency in the design and the editorial style though.

        • The Random One says:

          Spec work is a lot more common amongst writers than amongst all sorts of visual media creators (graphic designers, cartoonists, 3D modelers etc). I know not why that is, only that it is.

    • Bhazor says:

      I however don’t think you understand what you’re talking about.

      This is basic commission work.

      • N says:

        It is not basic commission work. That would mean ONE artist is hired and he does his job for a set price.

    • Premium User Badge

      darkChozo says:

      Speaking as someone who has no graphic design experience whatsoever, how exactly is this exploitative? Or at least, exploitative in a negative sense? It’s not like anyone is being forced to do this, nor are the devs obscuring anything about the process. If someone buys in, they’re doing it of their own free will, with all the information they need to make an informed decision. The parallel I’d make is to a company monetizing open source software and asking developers to contribute to the project; maybe you might find it distasteful, but it’s certainly not exploitative.

      • Baines says:

        The general argument for all situations is that people willing to work for free, or willing to work for under industry standard salaries, are hurting all the professional workers by driving down salaries and taking jobs.

        Draw a picture that gets used as a book cover without charging standard artists rates? You are hurting the professional artists. Write free code to fix a bug or add a feature? You are hurting the professional coders. Eager to work at a game review site, and see even a minimum wage salary as a bonus because you just want to play free games and get your foot in the door? You are taking a job that might otherwise have been given to a professional games journalist. Etc.

        The exploitation argument is that someone or some organization with money taking advantage of people who are willing to work for less than standard rates in order to get cheap work. Why hire a professional artist to do the cover of your next book when you can browse DeviantArt until you find someone willing to do it for a fraction of the going cost?

        In this particular case, even if the “winner” gets paid a fair rate for their model, you’ve also got all the people who aren’t winning. With no contracts or obligations from inXile, they get an unknown number of modellers to try to create a model which, at best, only one person will be paid for.

        Now, from my experience, where you side on the whole issues of free work and exploitation largely lies, well, on where you are professionally. And people can be hypocritical about it, as well. Lines might be drawn for “for friends”, or drawn in different places for different industries. For example, if you are a professional photographer, you might not like other photographers giving away work for free, but you might not complain when you are downloading a free game.

        • DrGhostman says:

          I think that pretty much sums it up beautifully. Its positively medieval– 1. increase barriers to entry in profession by creating guild, 2. collude on prices, 3. restrict output of your good….. 3. profit!!

        • pakoito says:

          >they get an unknown number of modellers to try to create a model which, at best, only one person will be paid for.

          Why just one model chosen for each concept? The more assets the better, why reusing stuff when you can have 10 different wrecked cars?

          The workload is also distributed in paralel between 10 people, instead of just one guy doing sequential work that would take months to complete. For inXile it’s all advantages.

    • Brother None says:

      As Lars pointed out above, this does not seem to meet the definition of spec work as provided by an anti spec work site.

      In fact, this follows the exact same logic of any Unity Asset store submission: you get to keep all rights, whether it is purchased or not, and you set the price yourself. The only difference is you are following detailed instructions in trade for a company looking at your work specifically. But the compensation level and rights are exactly the same as any Unity Asset store submission. So does you feel Unity Asset store is exploitative?

      • belgand says:

        Exactly. They want something that isn’t in the Asset Store so they put up some concept art and encourage people to post it to the Store so they can buy it.

      • njursten says:

        It all depends on how niche the requested models are. Will they sell OK in the store? Then it’s all fine, but if there is more or less no chance at all you’ll earn any money unless you get picked by inXile, then I’d call it exploitative.

  5. Hoaxfish says:

    As far as I’m aware, this is the only Kickstarter that’s pulled in the money (one of the higher amounts in fact) and is pursuing this sort of cheap outsourcing. I guess Unity’s popularity among kickstarters is more than just the cross-platform development.

    Not sure if I applaud them eking out the money, or if I’m wondering what they’re spending it on in-house.

    • LionsPhil says:

      I guess we’ll find out when the game is released, if it happens to have tons and tons of meaty gameplay content.

  6. Premium User Badge

    Morlock says:

    This bulllshit should be boycotted.

    • Premium User Badge

      Crimsoneer says:

      Backers ASKED for a way to get their assets in game. They responded, and allowed people to make a buck or sell their assets on in the process. What the hell else are they meant to do?

      They’re offering community members a chance to try to get into the game. This isn’t aimed at freelance artists, although they can try.

  7. MistyMike says:

    from the art guide:
    “mirror geometry to the extent that the silhouette feels mechanically nature”

    Not only they want the fanbase to make their assets, they also save on proofreading!

  8. TheTuninator says:

    Why are people so up in arms over this? inExile appears to be following the same well-documented crowdsourcing path established by Valve. Not only do I not recall people being highly critical of TF2 and DotA2 items being made via Steam Workshop/Polycount/etc, but indeed the “exploited” artists seem thrilled to have a chance for their work potentially to appear in a favorite game (and receive compensation for it).

    • Lewie Procter says:

      I don’t remember Valve ever posting concept art they wanted modelled, and then only paying out to one individual who made the model they liked the most for each item. I’d have probably responded in much the same way if they had.

      • TheTuninator says:

        I’m sorry, but I really do not see much of a difference.

        I just don’t see the claims of “exploitation” here. Not at all. People sure seem eager to be “exploited” by Valve to make tons of cosmetics for Valve’s games for free with no guarantee of return, because it’s fun for the artist and having the chance to get some of their work into a game is neat. Same applies here.

        Indeed, if a company can outsource some work to the fanbase and receive high-quality assets in return, I am all for that. More companies should do that! It makes the company’s job easier, it makes us get a better game, it makes fans have more of a hand in the game’s design, and it promotes creativity in the community. What’s not to like?

        • derbefrier says:

          Whats not to like? My guess would be this could lead to lower wages or something. Its gotta be about money..it always is with these kind of things.

          • hamburger_cheesedoodle says:

            It is absolutely about lower wages. As someone who has just graduated with an art degree, this sort of thing is making it impossible to get a job. Why would anyone ever hire an artist for a job when they can post a contest online and get hundreds of submissions for free, then pay the winner a pittance? There are a number of great articles on why this is destructive, but it essentially boils down to the fact that the entity wanting an art asset gets dozens or hundreds of people to do the job that just one person would normally do, but still only has to pay one person’s wages. (In many cases, the “salary” is the privilege of having published work, which means they don’t even have to pay anything at all, and they’ll still get more submissions than they can use.)

        • N says:

          How dense are you? We are speaking of different workloads and different payment methods. Valve pays a modeler for his work if it is accepted by giving him a cut each time the item is bought. Valve does not tell fifty people to model the same goddamn thing and then pays only one of them. Which is why some people are angry with this method of practice.

          • Premium User Badge

            darkChozo says:

            That would be a valid point, if the fifty people were in any way compelled to actually make the content outside of the potential for gain and general goodwill. I mean, sure, you can think it’s a bad deal and that it’s not worth your time, but that’s not exploitative, that’s just capitalism in action.

            Put another way, if a company offers you a job identical to what you do now, only for half your current salary, and you accept, does that mean that the company has done something wrong?

          • N says:

            I was trying to underline the differences, not arguing about exploitation and other crap.

            People seem to not understand the issues at hand. Making your own unique item and selling it in a shop is one thing. Making the same item as another bunch of people, and then flooding a virtual shop with interpretations of THE SAME SPECIFIC ITEM for a very small buyer base (we are not talking about glamour items for existing games; we are talking about programmers looking for specific post apocalyptic props, take note) is quite different. Not to mention the item is genuinely doomed to not be bought, because a better version of it will appear in Wasteland 2 anyway hah, so who will buy a copycat item of something appearing in another title? No one.

          • Supahewok says:

            So if you don’t think your work has a chance of getting bought, you don’t need to do a damn thing. I highly doubt anyone would be foolish enough to rely on this deal for steady employment. At worst, you’ve spent time that you would have spent anyway on a hobby or developing a portfolio, except you’ve got a chance to get some money and a professional recommendation? I mean, really now. Even if you don’t win, you’ve got portfolio pieces, and somebody else might pick them up, the devpool for Unity is growing all the time. There is literally no way you could lose on this UNLESS you focused on it for your sole employment. Which is stupid. And people who would do that would still do something else as stupid if this opportunity never existed.

          • TheTuninator says:

            Nowhere does it says that they will be accepting only ONE asset, and indeed if they get multiple high-quality assets for the same bit of concept art they would be fools not to use them all in order to create a more varied environment.

            inExile is not telling anyone to do anything. They are inviting Wasteland 2 fans who are graphic designers and feel like messing around to create assets which could be used in the game. Why is everyone acting like inExile is holding a gun to fans’ heads and making them work for free? Let the artists decide whether they are being ‘exploited” or whether they are simply being offered a great chance to do a fun project that might make it into Wasteland 2 proper.

            What’s more, Valve DOES issue directives as to what you can and cannot make. DotA items must be consistent with the existing color scheme and design principles of the hero or they will not be accepted for use.

            Ultimately, this is something which will benefit both the game, by allowing Wasteland 2 designers to work on more important assets such as elaborate environment setpieces and character design, and the fans, by allowing them to take a further hand in the creation of the game.

          • N says:

            I DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT EXPLOITATION. DO I HAVE TO CAPSLOCK THIS TO YOU? AM I GETTING THROUGH TO YOU NOW? IS THIS WORKING?

            Valve gives general “directives” and not *specific concept art*, do you not understand the difference?

            They state they will select 1 (one) “winner”, which will be paid. End of story.

            I won’t even dignify that other guy’s argument with a response, it is that ridiculous.

          • Supahewok says:

            But I wanna live in a world where I can’t lose… :(

            Anyway, I think Valve and InXile level out about the same. Valve may have less stringent instructions and requirements, but as you yourself said, they accept 1 and only 1 winner. InXile have more requirements in what they want, but check their actual rules. Nowhere does it say that they’ll only take one winner. See some of that concept art? The rocks and wrecked car in particular are very generic, and will likely be used very often. All they need are slight differences, and all of a sudden, you’ve got 20 different cars. You can’t use the same models over and over, reused assets are easy to spot. So for these in particular, and probably others, InXile will likely have more than one “winner” for the sake of diversity.

            So really, I think InXile is the better deal here. Better chance of winning, better chance of some money, (even if it’s not much) and most importantly, a better chance to add some serious weight to your resume.

          • N says:

            I am trying to explain what the sitch is to you apologists or “backers” or whatever you consider yourselves to be. I want you to grasp how the others see the issue and why they think it’s wrong (hint: it isn’t “wrong” per se, i.e. illegal, it just promotes sub-par work because it invites any idiot through the door). And I am trying to explain to you that the “Unity deal” is also crap. As a designer I would not buy a rejected asset from another game, would you? Would you use someone else’s leftovers? I doubt it.

          • HothMonster says:

            “They state they will select 1 (one) “winner”, which will be paid. End of story.”

            No they don’t. One of the things they are asking for now is rocks. You think they won’t buy more than one entrant if they like them?

            “it just promotes sub-par work because it invites any idiot through the door”

            They also won’t necessarily pick any entrant. If no one makes a bike they like they won’t buy it. It only promotes sub-par work if they start buying sub-par work.

            “As a designer I would not buy a rejected asset from another game”

            You would if it’s a good asset and you like it. Just because it doesn’t fit wasteland doesn’t mean it won’t be perfect for you. Everything on the asset store is something that other developers rejected.

            “Valve gives “directives” and not *specific concept art*, do you not understand the difference?”

            Saying, “make a sword that fits this characters personality and style while staying in our color pallet and we might pay you for it.” is a lot like saying, “make a train, turret, rock, or shack ect. that fits our game world and color scheme and we might buy it.” The concept art really isn’t that specific. It’s just make a destroyed car or a apocalypse shack. Have you actually looked at the page?

            I’d say the key difference with Valve is they already have a quality asset in dota. They have their own asset, they are just willing to let you sell assets in their store if they think it’s good enough. Because making a replacement hat for a preexisting asset is really similar to making a post-apocalyptic water tower.

          • N says:

            Then it is my mistake for misunderstanding their ambiguous announcement. I understand them buying general props (rocks and such) in batches, but some of those assets are very specific. The turret, the bike stand, those shacks, the radar dish.

            The major point I wanted to make with Valve/Steam Workshop is that their games already exists, and you get a cut every time someone buys your item. They leave ample, very ample room in fact, for your own design sensibilities. A bit too much really, some of the items in Dota2 seem to not really fit in there (they are mostly far too colorful or way to low poly sometimes). And there you have it, proof that letting people make their own crap is not automatically good practice.

          • HothMonster says:

            I’ve seen plenty of similar turrets, shacks and radar dishes in games, movies and comics of similar settings. It’s concept art not model by numbers. Go to the guide Notice how different that train model is very different from the train sketch?

            Well now I think you may be confusing the dota workshop with the dota store. Anything can be submitted to the workshop but nothing in the workshop can be purchased or used in the game. Valve selects stuff from the workshop with assistance from community votes and sells it in the store. The stuff in the store is very much inline with the characters and/or worlds color and visual quality.

            Though I admit it’s been a couple months since I played dota so there may have been some sudden huge decline in valve and the communities taste that has convinced people to buy shitty looking items that I don’t know about.

            I agree, as I believe I stated previously, that Valve already having existing assets is primary difference as far as I can see. But then again dota is still technically a beta so it could “release” with an independents asset being the primary asset for a character or included in the game for “with purchase”. That’s another thing that makes them hard to compare, valves game will be free but they own the store and wasteland is a for purchase game but they do not have known financial interest in the store. Also the dota store sells to an existing and large playerbase for an existing game while the unity store is a much smaller market selling to devs.

            But really valve certainly makes more money selling items than inxile will save by using a handful of generic assets.

          • N says:

            You are correct, I was thinking of the actual Dota2 store, not the Steam Workshop, my mistake. I don’t even know what Dota2 is like these days, I haven’t played in a while also (three or four months maybe?).

            L.E.

            I see you have edited your post a bit. My point is exactly as yours, that one turret for example suffices. If they would buy twenty types of rocks or whatever because they don’t really bear repeating (considering they are natural props), they have no need to buy more than one turret model, or more than one shack model/satellite dish, which they may repeat to their hearts content without bothering the viewer. There is nothing wrong with that.

            The major issue is with the quality of the work, which may end up not being top notch, and out of commodity the devs may throw in the game anyway. It is a sensible concern I think.

          • HothMonster says:

            I certainly hope the game doesn’t only have one shack and for every house in every village or that every town has the same water tower and radar array. Even the turret, if they see 3 they like they could easily use all three and give them to different factions or tribes. For the comparable prices on the unity store they could easily buy multiples of a type and still save money over having their regular artists spend the time on it.

            If the work is sub-par hopefully they don’t buy it or only use it once as a fan service instead of using it as their primary model for that item type. But if you don’t trust them to be able to pick decent assets I don’t know why you would trust them to make good assets. I hope they will pick good assets in the same way I hope they make a good game. Just having this avenue for asset acquisition doesn’t guarantee they will end up using shitty assets. They have made no obligation to buy anything.

          • N says:

            Yeah I’ve exaggerated about repetition and such. Other than that I don’t know man, it depends a lot on their art-director and most importantly their time frame, the only thing you can do now is wait and see how it plays out. If they get the attention of quality modelers (that basically want to work for free and regard this as a passion project more than anything) then it’s all fine and well.

    • Bhazor says:

      The difference is Valve.

      Valve can do no wrong and is run by the visionary Gabe “Hey sales means increased revenue!?!” Newell. Everyone else are obviously petty money grabbing scum bags.

      • Melliflue says:

        I’d say the difference is that Valve are providing a shop-front rather than asking for work. People are free to submit anything they like, but as already noted inXile are looking for models based off their concept art. Also, inXile will disregard all but one submission.

        • TheTuninator says:

          Valve is certainly asking for work at times (see: Polycount) and there is no indication that inExile will be accepting only one piece of art for each category.

        • InternetBatman says:

          That’s a bit untrue because they reserve the ability to reject items for Dota 2 that don’t match the visual style of the character.

    • monkeybars says:

      I’d argue there’s a distinction between creating add-on content that expands on an already finished product versus the developer calling for assets that will create that game.

  9. Wooly Wugga Wugga says:

    I’m in two minds about this. I can understand what people against spec-work are saying. I also think that inXile are going about this sort of thing the right way. They are offering fans the opportunity to contribute minor assets to the team, they are allowing people to retain full creative control of their creations and assisting the losers in finding other potential clients for their work nd providing them with a means for their work to be marketed to a larger audience.

    It is impossible for everyone’s work to be chosen but it does give a bunch of fans and amateurs the opportunity to try and have their work be used in a commercial game.

    So I’m going to avoid the usual cynicism here and instead of calling it spec-work I’m going to call it an open tender.

    • Baines says:

      Yes, this isn’t inXile trying to get free work.

      inXile isn’t going to say “Hey, thanks to this amazing scheme, we don’t need to hire that extra modeller!”

      It is inXile giving fans a chance to get an object of their making into a game that they want made. inXile could shut down the program today and not be any worse financially for it. Honestly, they might actually be better off financially if they did shut down the program. I’ve a feeling they are spending more money and more man hours doing this than they’d spend having their existing salaried art team churn out an extra 50 models or whatever.

  10. Unaco says:

    Well, it looks like there has been some… Fallout from this initiative/announcement.

  11. InternetBatman says:

    I think that this could easily hurt the quality of the game in the long run, because even though they provide specific guidelines and have a choice of objects to use, there’s something to be said about unified artstyle and synergistic creative expression. There could be small elements that slightly offset each other. Remember when people were complaining about how the ladder and car messed up scale for each other?

    • Supahewok says:

      If this doesn’t work out as planned, I have no doubt InXile will pull the plug on it and develop the assets themselves. Even before the success of the Kickstarter, Fargo was effusing on the possibilities for crowd-sourced development. This is just an experiment, they’ve put up less than 15 minor assets so far. (to the best of my knowledge, I may have heard wrong) They could probably do that work themselves in a couple of days with a professional studio. They can drop it anytime they want and make the assets themselves. If this works, it’s pretty cool. If it doesn’t, it’s harmless except for the hours spent on the assets, that can be bought by someone else, or used in portfolios.i say let them run with it a little.

  12. khomotso says:

    Kickstarter is asking people to put up money to see a creative product produced. Finding ways for them to also engage their time and effort doesn’t seem out of step with that whole ethos; it’s just the difference between cash and kind. If you object to that very idea of Kickstarter – being a bit exploitative of fans – this is more of the same. If you don’t, and you object to this, maybe you should be more consistent.

    If this becomes a way of building up a modding community before and after launch, I could see my way to tolerating that ethical hairsplitting.

    But I think professional designers will steer clear. It’s intended for amateurs to feel part of the process or maybe raise their game and break into something new. Laymen always think this should be fine. It’s ‘Extras’ casting, and it always ends up with a group of people being treated like shit. It’s just that for some people, being treated like shit is an ok way to get started.

    • Supahewok says:

      Hrm, your comment went up while I was writing mine, and I only ever saw your reply to my comment. I understand you’re position a little better here. As I said below and as some other people have said, even if this isn’t a good deal, it is a better deal than what’s offered by others. Think that’s what most the debate is about here, some people like you have said it’s shit while people like me are saying at least it smells better than the other shit. So we kinda agree, we just look at it different.

  13. Supahewok says:

    Holy backlash, Batman. What’s up, RPS? Has everyone gotten so bitter at Molyneux and Braden that they’ll lash out at anything else crowd-sourced? Chill, guys. (And girls)

    This reminds me of bid contract work. Most obvious examples are from private companies developing tech for the military, military opens up a contract, whichever company makes the best bid gets it. Also, so work in engineering is done the same way. Less obvious examples would be bids for work on some national monuments, like the Vietnam Memorial in Washington D.C. Was opened up for anyone to submit a design, I think the winner was a college student. Don’t know if she was paid. Would you say that was exploitative?

    Guys, come on. These guys ran a superb Kickstarter, have kept us all up to date with remarkable transparency, and are led by Brian Fargo who is in love with the idea of crowd-sourcing and is looking for more ways to let the players leave a mark in the game. This isn’t Molyneux’s broken promises. This isn’t Braben’s promise of a dream with nothing to show for it. This isn’t THQ invading an indie bundle. What is with y’all?

    • khomotso says:

      You seem to be largely unaware that this is a real issue in the professional design industry. Corporate bids on government contracts is not a good analogy, since the work is not completed as part of the bid.

      See: http://www.thelogofactory.com/logo_blog/index.php/spec-work-design-contests-crowdsourcing-designer-edition/

      • Supahewok says:

        Hmm, that’s true. Although, one could say that making minor 3d assets is significantly less work than designing military equipment. Plus, it’s not as is military contractors can take their rejected work to competitors, like what’s being offered here. Still, good point.

        If spec work is such an issue, (and honestly, I’ve heard of more problems with slavish work conditions than spec work in this industry) then this is at least a step in a positive direction. Even if this project doesn’t pick up your piece, someone else might. People do have different tastes and art styles for their games, even if InXile doesn’t think your piece is the best fit for their game someone else could want it. And it’s not exactly one winner takes all, either. They never said they would choose only one version of an asset. If one hundred versions of the wrecked car are submitted, for example, maybe 50 fit in their vision. Maybe they’ll have the budget for 30 of them. That’s 30 winners, and 30 different kinds of wrecked cars in their game, which cuts down on reused assets popping up over and over again.

        I can see the view where spec work could be harmful to people who rely on it for a living, but honestly? If you’re skilled at it, this is quite possibly the best way to do it: you put it up on a store where anybody can see it, with the guarantee that at least 1 developer WILL see it, anything accepted by them could be used to fill your portfolio with pro-certified work. If you can nail the style down and consistently get chosen, InXile may even come to you personally to do more work for them that isn’t spec work. (Note they haven’t said that, but if it were me in charge, I’d be on the lookout for talent) There is not bar to entry here. If you can imagine a better scenario, go right ahead and say it, I can’t think of it. Free coffee?

        And I know you’re gonna say that a better scenario is that artists get paid no matter what. I agree. I would love for there to be jobs enough all around so that spec work didn’t exist. That’s not the reality though. There is a bar to entry in any industry that you have to clear with experience, and if spec work is exploitative by nature, this is the best effort I’ve seen to minimize it for the benefit of the worker. InXile deserves commendations for at least taking a step in the right direction, not attacks.

      • Baines says:

        Bid contracts, at least the large ones, also seem fairly notorious for going over budget. The companies underbid and overpromise to get the contract. So contract bidding has its own issues.

        I’ve heard that some road construction companies in the US have been used as tax write-offs or other shady money deals, without even the intention of making a profit. Those underbid heavily, then rack up millions in late delivery penalties. If too many penalties mount up, they try to cut a deal with the state government to waive some fees, as the state would be worse off trying to switch contractors mid-contract. If they get banned from bidding, they “close” that company and start a new one with the same owners and board. (I personally know of one company that acted this way for possibly a couple of decades. I don’t know if they are still around, though.)

  14. oxykottin says:

    All this talk about exploiting is a little crazy. It is a contest you enter under the concept that if you get picked you will be used and paid. It is an opertunity that a no name artist with real skill may not have otherwise.

    How huge on your “artistic” resume to have your art to be on a major project like this. That is way more then whatever money they would be paid by Inxile.

  15. Strangerator says:

    I applaud this experiment and hope it works out well and saves money for the project. As a backer, I like to see my money being spent efficiently, it means the end product will be better.

    First Kicking it Forward and now this. In both cases, Fargo is creating opportunity for lesser known games/artists. It’s not so much about getting paid for an individual asset, it’s about the cool line on the resume that says, “My work has appeared in Wasteland 2, selected from hundreds of candidates.” It will help people get their work “out there.” Hell, they could even offer no payment for the winner, I just see that as a nice bonus in addition to having your work appear in what will be a pretty big game.

    “So it’s not exploitative, though the idea of the losers putting all that work in and getting nothing seems a but unfair.”

    I think you meant to say it’s a little TOO fair for your tastes. I am sick to death of the concept that we need to reward the mediocre along with the exceptional. I don’t want several thousand people attempting to design a “beaten up bicycle,” then having to send each creator of a mediocre design a dollar or something. The way it is set up will tend to attract fewer, more serious submissions. And having fewer submissions means you spend less time, and therefore money, evaluating each piece and seeing if it fits the game.

    • N says:

      The problem with crowdsourcing is that it helps the mediocre more than the exceptional. It allows everyone and their dog to enter. It is as if you would allow retarded kids to compete with actual athletes heh. This generally does not attract fewer artists, it does the opposite in fact, making those in charge of selecting and categorizing the entries trudge through a sea of filth, and even potentially missing out on some of the good stuff.

      I only hope this will attract a small number of good people from Polycount, rather than those that usually model stuff for the Unity store which is absolute trash for the most part.

      • Strangerator says:

        There may be some junk with this method, but my point was to say that you don’t want to offer “runner-up” style rewards or you risk greatly multiplying junk submissions. As to your analogy to the mentally disabled, I think they should be allowed to compete with anyone they want, so long as we still only give trophies to those who win. Mentally disabled doesn’t always mean physically disabled anyway.

        • N says:

          Fair enough, I was merely trying to stress the fact that it’s usually better to have a small group of “elites” to choose from rather than anyone who falls through your barn door. I would have just placed this add on Polycount and let the pros handle it. Win all the way.

          “Mentally disabled doesn’t always mean physically disabled anyway ”

          ^ lol you’re funny.

  16. The Smilingknight says:

    Listen up!

    First. Im the backer of this project. This is completely in line with what I and other backers expect of this whole venture.
    If you are not a backer of this fine project it is your constitutionally assured right to hit the road.
    Do you ladies understand me?

    Second. People are getting a deal with Unity – same as anyone else who does this for Unity store.
    You got a problem with that – complain to Unity store. Or random people on the street who will listen to you.

    Third. The biggest requirement is quality. If you would prefer that your submissions get approved without quality control – you can take a hike.

    Fourth. For everyone involved – who chose to do so and submit their work – according to the rules freely available on Unity store web pages and related inXile announcement article detailing rules and regulations of this endevour – this brings a great chance to have a very nice resume boost. Which is very very worthy thing to have in pursuing a whole career in this business – which is very volatile as you all very well know.

    Fifth. Others do these kinds of things for a hobby and would appreciate having something of their own in the game they have already backed with their money – as well as appreciating the fact that their submission will get onto Unity store and the fact they will get money from each future sale while pertaining all rights to their work.

    Sixth. The rules are openly available to everyone. If you choose not to accept these rules as is your constitutionally assured and maybe even a god given right you are completely free to take a hike.

    Seventh. We thank you for your contribution to the cause of keeping the opinion numbers high.
    If we ever run out, well be sure to come here and contact you guys.

    ….

    you can leave now?

    • Supahewok says:

      And here’s a guy who summed up all the arguments of us supporters using half the words I’ve used so far. Thanks for reminding once again that brevity is a virtue in a language and that I still lack it.

      So, is there a member of the opposition who cares to summarize their arguments so that we might have a side by side comparison before realizing that none of this is as big a deal as warrants the amount of time we’ve spent on it, so that we can return to our lives and waste our time in other ways?

      • The Smilingknight says:

        Thank you dear colleague.
        If im not mistaken, by my calculations at 2.33 AM local time the levels of civilian opinions we have at this side of the globe reached capacitor recommended levels. Ensuring operating at full level for foreseeable future.

        pertaining to usual corrections of estimations made by other esteemed colleagues around the globe. of course.

    • khomotso says:

      I’m not unsympathetic to your view, but everyone who’s popping off with their self-righteously commonsensical take on this single news item are probably better off at least recognizing that there is a longstanding debate on the ethics of ‘spec work’ (or, more narrowly, crowdsourcing design work), that it has a major impact on design professionals, and you should at least recognize that it exists as a well-trod and well-considered ethical issue before you try to pretend that you have insight to bring to the table.

      Do a quick Google search on ‘spec work.’ Browse through some of the arguments and how they are answered (Guess what! All of yours have been answered many times over). It may not change your view, but it should help you refine your argument, and feel a little less like you’re being the voice of reason in a world gone mad.

      Those who are persuaded that spec work is ethically dubious are objecting more to the professional climate it leaves in its wake, not that any single episode can’t be rationalized. It’s more like an argument for recycling – the net result when a certain behavior becomes commonplace, in the aggregate – than it is an argument against criminal misbehavior in any particular case.

      • Strangerator says:

        “I’m not unsympathetic to your view, but everyone who’s popping off with their self-righteously commonsensical take on this single news item are probably better off at least recognizing that there is a longstanding debate on the ethics of ‘spec work’ (or, more narrowly, crowdsourcing design work), that it has a major impact on design professionals, and you should at least recognize that it exists as a well-trod and well-considered ethical issue before you try to pretend that you have insight to bring to the table.”

        Any serious consideration of this current issue will reveal that this does not fit the definition of ‘spec work.’ In fact, attempting to classify what inXile is doing as such does injustice not only to the developers but also could cause people new to the issue to believe that it is a non-issue. In a case like this, where as you say “common sense” tells us nothing wrong is going on, people could come to the conclusion that there is no substance to this issue as a whole.

        That said, you’d do better to criticize those calling this an example of spec work for muddying the issue. I’m sure it’s a legitimately debated topic, but this is not an example of it.

      • The Smilingknight says:

        Ok, who let this civilian in?

        Sir, could you just stand there until the MPs get here and escort you off the base?
        Indeed, while we wait for them to arrive let me assure you that we here in the base Cochise all heartily sympathize with, not only this, but many plights civilians endure in their daily lives.

        Let me extended warm and honest condolences of the entire base staff and AI entities to all your fellow citizens suffering these harsh issues in the entertainment industry. We understand and fully sympathize with you all.

        In fact im sure you will be glad to hear that base Cochise intends to do more than that. in cooperation with many experts in the field we have contrived a plan to go beyond the call of duty and extend a helping hand to the wider community encompassing all willing to lend a hand and join into our new program. Developed in some secrecy, completely in house with that precise purpose.
        Aimed especially at those struggling to catch a good current in those cold waters of international game industry despite having a talent and know-how.
        As you might imagine – the know how has always been highly valued here at the base.
        And supporting talented individuals has always been one of our hallmarks.

        It is albeit small step perhaps, but lets just say we hope it is but first of many… and we all know that small steps are sometimes the most important ones.
        In that vein I am happy to announce impending news about another small program of this sort going under the codename C.L.A.S.S.I.C.

        If you yourself are struggling with unfair conditions and difficulties we would like to point you out to this handy leaflet containing all information necessary to contribute.
        And suggest you yourself maybe attempt submitting your creation to our new Unity store testing labs which of course guarantee fair government approved wages to all – subjected to the usual range of quality testing control as described in sections 2 to 7 of paragraph D-J17 sub section civilian relations code T1000 XZ EHFR dash 255. – of course.

        – ah! I see the MPs are arriving. please follow their instructions and proper procedures designed to ensure your safety and comfort. We thank you for your generous contribution and effort.

  17. pilouuuu says:

    Beware people! They will be pointing a gun forcing you to make assets for their game! You’ll be working in a sweatshop during all the game development.

    Oh, well. That’s not the case… People will be making assets because they WANT to, because they may get slightly more famous and they’ll get the pride of having their name in a game. And they even may get paid for that.

    What are you complaining about, you bitter and jaded complainers? Stop complaining. No one is forcing you to have anything to do with this game as no one forced you to fund it. Just let other people have fun!

    • luukdeman111 says:

      indeed! this whole discussion about this being exploitative is just like calling $5.000,- pledges exploitative…. Sure, the reward is worth nowhere near the amount of money you spend on it, but it’s a choice you get to make, just to get your name in the game and to help out some guys who are doing a great job…

  18. frightlever says:

    Calling spec work exploitation is the kind of protective language you hear from master trade guilds and the like. It’s understandable, but it’s not about protecting new artists (in the broad sense) in a field, it’s primarily about protecting the existing livelihood of established artists. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

    In other professions new blood is discouraged from upsetting the apple cart by introducing an expensive licensing procedure – a common system in the US where individual states and counties have their own licensing demands with no official recognition of different area’s licences. The system is ostensibly to protect the public, but as often as not it’s more concerned with protecting the interests of the incumbent operators.

    Exploitation in the creative market is rife, however. There’s an on-going publishing scam being pulled multiple times a month by different organizations running “Short story competitions” that require an entry fee, sorry a reader’s fee. That’s exploitation.

    Asking a creative to voluntarily produce something in the hope of getting paid and receiving widespread publicity. Not exploitative. Competitive tender is a thing.

    Asking someone to write for free on a website. Not exploitative. But if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys, and the website will always be an also-ran. (edit: though having said that, some big newspapers still pull that stunt, don’t they? And the Forbes blogs are paid based on traffic, right? Hmm.)

  19. DrGhostman says:

    Haters; – Funny that no one is complaining about the time spent putting together giant block statues of Megaman or Zelda in Minecraft. The act of creating a work of art is quite obviously in many cases reward enough for ALOT of people.

    Don’t complain about the time I like to use creating a bicycle for Wasteland. I’m just going to use a better interface to do it. The more of these kind of opportunities to channel creativity in a productive way the better.

  20. psulli says:

    I love that backers of the project think that that should carry some special weight in the RPS comment section.

    The only thing that bothers me a tiny bit about this is that is sounds like a cross between Second World and Burning Man.

  21. Rick Lion says:

    I fully understand that opportunity to make contribution in game – it’s a great. I look at Nexus Mods and look results of funwork better than results of work of main developers of different games. Modders it’s a big and powerful race of people which made games better.

    Me don’t like this situation in a moral point of view. I fully understand that is a best decision to maker world of Wasteland 2 bigger, faster and maybe better. But i don’t like it as don’t like something child, which can say:

    – I want that Brian Fargo and team make the game (petulantly stamping her foot).

    Brian Fargo is a good bussines man. And he know that it’s way better. Know that it economy time of development team, which take a time on more important things. But what can I do if I do not like that approach? Just say. Here. Now.

    And go back to the self-indie projects (laugh)

    • N says:

      Rick Lion: epic troll back there dude, well done.

      • Rick Lion says:

        N
        No. No troll back. Troll arrive if you want. It’s a first comment on RPS. )

  22. Caiman says:

    Someone tries something slightly different, Internet complains. Life continues.

  23. Pathetic Phallacy says:

    It wasn’t enough to have your game funded? You need to have your game made for you as well!?

    • Rick Lion says:

      to Pathetic Phallacy
      If this message for me, and i understand it correctly i’ll try to answer. If this not for me – just skip my text.

      On the screens you can see our unfinished long play game. “Long play” because we can’t reach the funding at this moment. All that’s offered to us before include one bad scenario. We can make the game but investor send to us big boss. We don’t like big bosses and instructions from them. And… now we indie developers. ~ 2,5 years. When you not successfully indie developer you cannot live – you be to survive (laugh).

      At present time we do little games and in free time from little games we do the big games. So, yeah … We have our own game. But while we can not do more. Although it would be desirable. Very.

  24. CdrJameson says:

    Surely this is an Inducement Prize Contest?

    That is, you set a spec and the first/best person to meet the spec gets the prize.

    It’s exploitative (in the economics sense) because the person setting the competition gets much more effort devoted to the work done than they actually pay for.
    The article cites 10x-20x, but in this case though I reckon they could get several hundred times the prize offered.

    Entertainingly explained by Tim Harford here.

  25. Roz says:

    I’d like a new keyboard, after reading:
    ‘It’s described as “beat to shit”, which is also my rap name. ‘, my current one is covered in drink.